The Foreign Service Journal, September 2016

THE FOREIGN SERVICE JOURNAL | SEPTEMBER 2016 7 partners whose leadership principles do not embrace dissent as fully as ours), let me note that we routinely add as much value pointing out what will work as we do pointing out what won’t work. We who typically understand the local context better than anyone else in the U.S. government are often the first to see that a long-shot goal might just be achievable if we frame the arguments a certain way, avoid that third rail, garner support from this key group while not alerting another too early. Delivering on those long-shot goals may show incredible, even unusual, initiative and innovation. It may be out- standing performance, but it’s not dissent. The Foreign Service adds tremendous value every time we advise with preci- sion about what will work and what won’t work in the local context at our posts. This is a core role of the Foreign Service, and it is often the basis for well-founded constructive dissent. There is something else to consider. When AFSA gives only one award for dissent, a question naturally arises: Is the space for constructive dissent closing? This is both a fair question and a power- ful, foundational one, given our role in the interagency “ecosystem.” Pointing out that something Washing- ton wants just won’t fly requires cour- age and often risks repercussions. The perceived price for doing the right thing, for engaging in constructive dissent, rises, I am convinced, when we feel insecure in our careers. When, for example, mid-level officers need to worry about there being more bidders than jobs, or when senior officers see their career paths blocked by appoin- tees from outside the Foreign Service, we shouldn’t be surprised if dissent declines. Our dissent awards honor those who stand up and call it like they see it. We all need to defend the space for constructive dissent, which is, in my view, inextricably intertwined with defending a strong, pro- fessional career Foreign Service. n THE DISSENT CHANNEL Excerpt from 2 FAM 070 Dissent Channel 2 FAM 071 POLICY 2 FAM 071.1 Policy Statement a. It is Department of State policy that all U.S. citizen employees, foreign and domestic, be able to express dis- senting or alternative views on substantive issues of policy, in a manner which ensures serious, high-level review and response. b. The State Department has a strong interest in facilitat- ing open, creative, and uncensored dialogue on substantive foreign policy issues within the professional foreign affairs community, and a responsibility to foster an atmosphere supportive of such dialogue, including the opportunity to offer alternative or dissenting opinions without fear of penalty. The Dissent Channel was created to allow its users the opportunity to bring dissenting or alternative views on substantive foreign policy issues, when such views can- not be communicated in a full and timely manner through regular operating channels or procedures, to the attention of the Secretary of State and other senior State Department officials in a manner which protects the author from any penalty, reprisal, or recrimination. c. Freedom from reprisal for Dissent Channel users is strictly enforced; officers or employees found to have engaged in retaliation or reprisal against Dissent Channel users, or to have divulged to unauthorized personnel the source or contents of Dissent Channel messages, will be subject to disciplinary action. Dissent Channel messages, including the identity of the authors, are a most sensitive element in the internal deliberative process and are to be protected accordingly. 2 FAM 071.2 Scope The Dissent Channel is reserved for consideration of dissenting or alternative views on substantive foreign policy matters. The Dissent Channel may not be used to address non-policy issues (e.g., management or personnel issues that are not significantly related to substantive matters of policy). Complaints relating to violation of law, rules, or regulations; mismanagement; or fraud, waste, or abuse may be addressed to OIG/INV. Classification challenges should not be addressed through the Dissent Channel. The Foreign Service adds tremendous value every time we advise with precision about what will work, and what won’t work, in the local context at our posts.